#7 - Specific Reference, Strengthen

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (B).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[vrodriguez2@ymail.com]

Please explain why B is the correct answer choice. Is there some sort of implied persuasion between "emphasis on grammar instruction in primary schools and lifelong adherence to the rules of usage taught there." ??

[Jeff Wren]

Hi vrodriguez,

Question 7 is asking us to strengthen the claims made in the 4th and 5th sentences of the final paragraph, which are:

"In the end it must be acknowledged that the laws governing the transformation of language are not like the laws of physics. Language usage depends on choices made by individuals, who are subject to persuasion."

Answer B states:

"A study found a strong correlation between emphasis on grammar instruction in primary schools and lifelong adherence to the rules of usage taught there."

As to your question, there is definitely implied persuasion happening during grammar instruction in primary schools. All "persuasion" means here is that the language usage choices one makes are able to be influenced by other people (such as when one is taught grammar in primary school). "Persuasion" is not being used here in a narrower sense that we might usually think of such as begging, using flattery, etc. If a child is taught that "this is the only correct way to use a certain word," and that person follows that rule throughout life, then he or she can be said to have been "persuaded."

This is distinguished from the laws of physics, which do not change based on persuasion.

[ToddVanV]

I chose A, which was wrong. Can you please explain why A could not be correct?

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Todd,

Sure!

As Jeff mentioned in his very good response on answer choice B, what we're trying to strengthen is the argument that (1) language development is not like physics (it doesn't proceed according to natural, predictable, unchanging/unchangeable laws); and (2) language is shaped by individual choice, which is subject to persuasion. To strengthen those points, we'd want an answer suggesting that language development is something happening because of persuasion, and/or also undermining the idea that language development happens "naturally," like laws of physics, in ways that aren't really changeable or subject to elite influence.

The problem with answer choice A is, first, that I don't see the "persuasion" aspect: where in the answer is one individual or group of individuals convincing another to use language in certain ways? And, second, what I do see seems to suggest something that looks like the laws of physics and nature, where things happen in regular, predictable, unchangeable ways (communities typically develop similar rules). So because answer choice A doesn't hit either of the things I wanted it to do to strengthen, it has to be ruled out.

[TootyFrooty]

Hi Todd,

Sure!

As Jeff mentioned in his very good response on answer choice B, what we're trying to strengthen is the argument that (1) language development is not like physics (it doesn't proceed according to natural, predictable, unchanging/unchangeable laws); and (2) language is shaped by individual choice, which is subject to persuasion. To strengthen those points, we'd want an answer suggesting that language development is something happening because of persuasion, and/or also undermining the idea that language development happens "naturally," like laws of physics, in ways that aren't really changeable or subject to elite influence.

The problem with answer choice A is, first, that I don't see the "persuasion" aspect: where in the answer is one individual or group of individuals convincing another to use language in certain ways? And, second, what I do see seems to suggest something that looks like the laws of physics and nature, where things happen in regular, predictable, unchangeable ways (communities typically develop similar rules). So because answer choice A doesn't hit either of the things I wanted it to do to strengthen, it has to be ruled out.

I chose A because I felt persuasion or influence would be from another community however I quickly crossed off B because it spoke more about learning grammar while growing up. Can you please expand further on this? thanks

[Jeff Wren]

Hi TootyFrooty,

In Answer A, you definitely should not assume that "persuasion or influence would be from another community." Nothing in Answer A suggests this. In fact, it actually implies the opposite. If communities are "left to formulate their own rules," that would suggest that they are formulating their language on their own without reference to other languages. The fact that unrelated, unconnected communities all develop similar language rules would suggest that languages do follow certain standard rules (like the laws of physics) and aren't based on individual choices subject to persuasion. If anything, Answer A may weaken the author's argument rather than strengthen it.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, grammar instruction in primary schools would be a form of persuasion, meaning that the students are taught (i.e. convinced, or persuaded) that certain rules of language are correct and others are not. Again, you may not think of being taught something as the same as being persuaded, but, in a broader sense, it is. For example, if a parent "teaches" their child that it is wrong to lie, that parent is persuading/convincing them about this issue.

The fact that these students adhere to these rules throughout their lives supports the claim that persuasion works and strengthens the author's argument.

[sqmusgrave]

Hi! Could someone please explain why D is wrong? I thought that if it was consistent within a community but not across communities that implied language was being shaped by some kind of social pressure (e.g. persuasion) which is why its consistent within. And it implies that it doesn't behave in some universal law like way, which is why it's not consistent across the groups, since one groups persuasion wouldn't be reaching the other groups. Can someone tell me why this is wrong? Thanks!

[Chandler H]

Hi! Could someone please explain why D is wrong? I thought that if it was consistent within a community but not across communities that implied language was being shaped by some kind of social pressure (e.g. persuasion) which is why its consistent within. And it implies that it doesn't behave in some universal law like way, which is why it's not consistent across the groups, since one groups persuasion wouldn't be reaching the other groups. Can someone tell me why this is wrong? Thanks!

Hi sqmusgrave,

The question stem is asking us to strengthen the assertion that the laws of language are not like the laws of physics, because the laws depend on individual choices and can be affected by persuasion.

Answer choice (D) asserts that students are more likely to agree on grammar rules if they had very little prior instruction in correct grammar usage. From this, we can infer that students are less likely to agree on grammar rules if they have more instruction in correct usage. In fact, this seems to contradict the "language laws are affected by persuasion" assertion. If that was true, then wouldn't the students with a robust language education logically have an easier time agreeing on grammar rules, since they were all already persuaded to use correct grammar?

Answer choice (B), on the other hand, has that exact premise: a robust emphasis on early grammar instruction (a.k.a., strong persuasion) correlates with usage of that instruction. That is, the children who were persuaded to use language a certain way stuck to those laws. This matches the assertion in the stimulus.

Does this make sense?